Unitized Regenerative Fuel Cells: A Review on Developed Catalyst Systems and Bipolar Plates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Severe crisis of energy that our planet is going to face in the near future demands rapid development of alternative energy harnessing and storing devices. Various alternative energy devices have been developed so far, including solar cells, batteries and fuel cells, in order to compete and replace the traditionally used fossil fuel based energy technologies. A very recent addition to the list of such devices is the unitized regenerative fuel cell (URFC), which can function as a dual, i.e., electrolyzer‐cum‐fuel cell, device. In remote areas, where utilization of conventionally used energy sources results in high expense, URFC can serve as the best energy option, due to its relatively low cost, high efficiency and light weight. URFC utilizes bifunctional electrodes, which function in a dual mode of water electrolysis and fuel cell. The prime focus of URFC research has been to develop various low cost and highly efficient catalysts and catalyst supports towards the fabrication of alternative bifunctional electrodes and to fabricate strong and efficient bipolar plates. The aim of this review is to highlight the main outcomes of these aspects of research on URFCs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".